<em><strong>Yeah it's a good game, but it's also got flaws. One of the important things to remember, is something a lot of these negative reviews don't take in account for, if Paradox were to simply make Hearts of Iron III again with new graphics, all it's going to do is reduce the amount of players who are going to purchase the game. So in order to compromise between the hardcore players and the new players, they needed to dumb down certain systems, which is perfectly fine for anyone who wants to play a game and not obsess over it, regardless it is still game which needs hundreds of hours to fully master. With that said, it's very fun when playing with your friends, it's easy to get used to after the time put into it, and can be a ton of fun. If this game wasn't a sequel, many reviews would be positive which is important to note.

Some of the major flaws however which are quite game-breaking are the following:

- Germany is extremely underpowered. In real life Denmark surrendered within a few hours, in this game I've seen Germany stuck in Denmark for years. Germany also fails to invade Russia, I have yet to see any playthroughs or games where Germany actually makes remote progress into Russia. Same with some of the other Axis powers, including Japan who struggles to take China, and I've never seen actually go into the Pacific and become a real threat. Italy however is quite balanced, but perhaps even too strong, I've seen Italy become much more powerful than Germany several times which can be a problem.

- Terrain plays very little part in Africa which needs to be fixed. I'm tired of stretching my front lines into the Sarah desert, because it's aparently in this game a really easy place move through. In most ww2 board games the entire Sarah Desert is blocked out becaues it is IMPOSSIBLE to move an army through there. I'd like to increase the amount of provinces on the coast of Africa, and remove accessibility in the Sarah almost entirely.

- Russia's army... It's never really a struggle when Germany and Russia fight, it's just sort of Germany throwing a few jabs and Russia having Germany by a headlock, slowly suffocating them until they completely break.

- The game is a little too fast paced, it's very rare that the year is going to get to late war 1940's without the entire war ending because of mass invasions, so simply reducing Allied agressiveness and replacing it with extensive planning would be great.. Also by the time you get to a late game 1942+, the game sort of starts to feel like it's breaking. If anyone has played Europa Universalis IV, you'll know if you start in 1444 and finish an entire game by the 1830's, it begins to become very clunky by then; this seems to happen here unfortunately with certain spammed units, and resources.

- Speaking of mass invasions, the naval invasion planning for the AI is decent, but the naval invasion defending for the AI is awful. The AI seems to not defend it's shores properly and so is invaded every month by a bunch of suicide squads of a few divisions. The defending nation should properly set up on the shores, and the invading AI should instead of invading a bunch of mini times each month, invade one major time each couple of years (if neccesary).

Regardless of these major problems it is still fun when playing multiplayer, so make sure you play with friends. If you're looking at it less from a ww2 historian standpoint, and more of just a regular game standpoint, it can be a great sandbox for molding your nation (even if it's not historically involved in ww2) into whatever you want it to be.

Very nice game, with simple balancing issues. Overall I'd like to see Germany stronger, Japan stronger (at least in 1936), less cahos on the map with more solid fronts, completely reworked naval invasion mechanics, a reworked Africa, and some rework to the endgame.</strong></em>

<em><strong>Yeah it's a good game, but it's also got flaws. One of the important things to remember, is something a lot of these negative reviews don't take in account for, if Paradox were to simply make Hearts of Iron III again with new graphics, all it's going to do is reduce the amount of players who are going to purchase the game. So in order to compromise between the hardcore players and the new players, they needed to dumb down certain systems, which is perfectly fine for anyone who wants to play a game and not obsess over it, regardless it is still game which needs hundreds of hours to fully master. With that said, it's very fun when playing with your friends, it's easy to get used to after the time put into it, and can be a ton of fun. If this game wasn't a sequel, many reviews would be positive which is important to note. Some of the major flaws however which are quite game-breaking are the following: - Germany is extremely underpowered. In real life Denmark surrendered within a few hours, in this game I've seen Germany stuck in Denmark for years. Germany also fails to invade Russia, I have yet to see any playthroughs or games where Germany actually makes remote progress into Russia. Same with some of the other Axis powers, including Japan who struggles to take China, and I've never seen actually go into the Pacific and become a real threat. Italy however is quite balanced, but perhaps even too strong, I've seen Italy become much more powerful than Germany several times which can be a problem. - Terrain plays very little part in Africa which needs to be fixed. I'm tired of stretching my front lines into the Sarah desert, because it's aparently in this game a really easy place move through. In most ww2 board games the entire Sarah Desert is blocked out becaues it is IMPOSSIBLE to move an army through there. I'd like to increase the amount of provinces on the coast of Africa, and remove accessibility in the Sarah almost entirely. - Russia's army... It's never really a struggle when Germany and Russia fight, it's just sort of Germany throwing a few jabs and Russia having Germany by a headlock, slowly suffocating them until they completely break. - The game is a little too fast paced, it's very rare that the year is going to get to late war 1940's without the entire war ending because of mass invasions, so simply reducing Allied agressiveness and replacing it with extensive planning would be great.. Also by the time you get to a late game 1942+, the game sort of starts to feel like it's breaking. If anyone has played Europa Universalis IV, you'll know if you start in 1444 and finish an entire game by the 1830's, it begins to become very clunky by then; this seems to happen here unfortunately with certain spammed units, and resources. - Speaking of mass invasions, the naval invasion planning for the AI is decent, but the naval invasion defending for the AI is awful. The AI seems to not defend it's shores properly and so is invaded every month by a bunch of suicide squads of a few divisions. The defending nation should properly set up on the shores, and the invading AI should instead of invading a bunch of mini times each month, invade one major time each couple of years (if neccesary). Regardless of these major problems it is still fun when playing multiplayer, so make sure you play with friends. If you're looking at it less from a ww2 historian standpoint, and more of just a regular game standpoint, it can be a great sandbox for molding your nation (even if it's not historically involved in ww2) into whatever you want it to be. Very nice game, with simple balancing issues. Overall I'd like to see Germany stronger, Japan stronger (at least in 1936), less cahos on the map with more solid fronts, completely reworked naval invasion mechanics, a reworked Africa, and some rework to the endgame.</strong></em>